Unlocking the genetic code: Exploring the potential of DNA barcoding for biodiversity assessment

Mohammad Ahmad Ahmad Odah; Mohammad Ahmad Ahmad Odah

doi:10.3934/molsci.2023016

AIMS Molecular Science

2023, Volume 10, Issue 4: 263-294. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2023016

Previous Article Next Article

Review

Unlocking the genetic code: Exploring the potential of DNA barcoding for biodiversity assessment

Mohammad Ahmad Ahmad Odah ^,

Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University, Preparatory Year Deanship, Basic Science Department, 151 Alkharj 11942, KSA

Received: 01 June 2023 Revised: 01 August 2023 Accepted: 27 September 2023 Published: 22 November 2023

DNA barcoding is a crucial method for assessing and monitoring species diversity amidst escalating threats to global biodiversity. I explore DNA barcoding's potential as a robust and reliable tool for biodiversity assessment. It begins with a comprehensive review of existing literature, delving into the theoretical foundations, methodologies and applications of DNA barcoding. The suitability of various DNA regions, like the COI gene, as universal barcodes are extensively investigated. Additionally, the advantages and limitations of different DNA sequencing technologies and bioinformatics tools are evaluated within the context of DNA barcoding. To evaluate the efficacy of DNA barcoding, diverse ecosystems, including terrestrial, freshwater and marine habitats, are sampled. Extracted DNA from collected specimens undergoes amplification and sequencing of the target barcode region. Comparison of the obtained DNA sequences with reference databases allows for the identification and classification of the sampled organisms. Findings demonstrate that DNA barcoding accurately identifies species, even in cases where morphological identification proves challenging. Moreover, it sheds light on cryptic and endangered species, aiding conservation efforts. I also investigate patterns of genetic diversity and evolutionary relationships among different taxa through the analysis of genetic data. This research contributes to the growing knowledge on DNA barcoding and its applicability for biodiversity assessment. The advantages of this approach, such as speed, accuracy and cost-effectiveness, are highlighted, along with areas for improvement. By unlocking the genetic code, DNA barcoding enhances our understanding of biodiversity, supports conservation initiatives and informs evidence-based decision-making for the sustainable management of ecosystems.
- DNA barcoding,
- biodiversity assessment,
- genetic code,
- species identification,
- taxonomic resolution,
- next-generation sequencing,
- barcode reference library
Citation: Mohammad Ahmad Ahmad Odah. Unlocking the genetic code: Exploring the potential of DNA barcoding for biodiversity assessment[J]. AIMS Molecular Science, 2023, 10(4): 263-294. doi: 10.3934/molsci.2023016

Related Papers:

Abstract

DNA barcoding is a crucial method for assessing and monitoring species diversity amidst escalating threats to global biodiversity. I explore DNA barcoding's potential as a robust and reliable tool for biodiversity assessment. It begins with a comprehensive review of existing literature, delving into the theoretical foundations, methodologies and applications of DNA barcoding. The suitability of various DNA regions, like the COI gene, as universal barcodes are extensively investigated. Additionally, the advantages and limitations of different DNA sequencing technologies and bioinformatics tools are evaluated within the context of DNA barcoding. To evaluate the efficacy of DNA barcoding, diverse ecosystems, including terrestrial, freshwater and marine habitats, are sampled. Extracted DNA from collected specimens undergoes amplification and sequencing of the target barcode region. Comparison of the obtained DNA sequences with reference databases allows for the identification and classification of the sampled organisms. Findings demonstrate that DNA barcoding accurately identifies species, even in cases where morphological identification proves challenging. Moreover, it sheds light on cryptic and endangered species, aiding conservation efforts. I also investigate patterns of genetic diversity and evolutionary relationships among different taxa through the analysis of genetic data. This research contributes to the growing knowledge on DNA barcoding and its applicability for biodiversity assessment. The advantages of this approach, such as speed, accuracy and cost-effectiveness, are highlighted, along with areas for improvement. By unlocking the genetic code, DNA barcoding enhances our understanding of biodiversity, supports conservation initiatives and informs evidence-based decision-making for the sustainable management of ecosystems.

Acknowledgments

I would like to express our heartfelt appreciation and gratitude to Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University for their unwavering support and encouragement throughout our research project. Without their support, this study would not have been possible. I would also like to extend our sincere thanks to the faculty members and research staff at Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University, namely Prof. Farag Elessawy, Dr. Mohammad Mahzari, Dr. Mohammad Shaie Al-Matrafi and Dr. Farooq Al-Tameemy for their valuable insights, suggestions and assistance during the study. Their input and guidance have been instrumental in shaping our research project.

Conflict of interest

There is no conflict of interest associated with this work.

References

[1]	Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL, et al. (2003) Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc R Soc Lond B 270: 313-321. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.2218
[2]	Hajibabaei M, Singer GAC, Clare EL, et al. (2007) Design and applicability of DNA arrays and DNA barcodes in biodiversity monitoring. BMC Biol 5: 24. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7007-5-24
[3]	Shokralla S, Porter TM, Gibson JF, et al. (2015) Massively parallel multiplex DNA sequencing for specimen identification using an Illumina MiSeq platform. Sci Rep 5: 9687. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep09687
[4]	Cawthorn DM, Steinman HA, Witthuhn RC (2017) DNA barcoding reveals a high incidence of fish species misrepresentation and substitution on the South African market. Food Res Int 46: 30-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2011.11.011
[5]	Hollingsworth PM, Graham SW, Little DP (2011) Choosing and using a plant DNA barcode. PLoS One 6: e19254. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0019254
[6]	Hebert PDN, Cywinska A, Ball SL, et al. (2003) Biological identifications through DNA barcodes. Proc Biol Sci 270: 313-321. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2002.2218
[7]	Miescher JF (1871) Ueber die chemische Zusammensetzung der Eiterzellen. Med Chem Unters 4: 441-460.
[8]	Watson JD, Crick FHC (1953) Molecular structure of nucleic acids: A structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature 171: 737-738. https://doi.org/10.1038/171737a0
[9]	Mullis KB, Faloona FA (1987) Specific synthesis of DNA in vitro via a polymerase-catalyzed chain reaction. Method Enzymol 155: 335-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/0076-6879(87)55023-6
[10]	Ratnasingham S, Hebert PDN (2007) Bold: The barcode of life data system. Mol Ecol Notes 7: 355-364. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2007.01678.x
[11]	Shokralla S, Gibson JF, Nikbakht H, et al. (2014) Next-generation DNA barcoding: Using next-generation sequencing to enhance and accelerate DNA barcode capture from single specimens. Mol Ecol Resour 14: 892-901. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12236
[12]	Felsenstein J (1985) Confidence limits on phylogenies: An approach using the bootstrap. Evolution 39: 783-791. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.1985.tb00420.x
[13]	Deagle BE, Eveson JP, Jarman SN (2006) Quantification of damage in DNA recovered from highly degraded samples–a case study on DNA in faeces. Front Zool 3: 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-9994-3-11
[14]	Kress WJ, Erickson DL (2007) A two-locus global DNA barcode for land plants: The coding rbcL gene complements the non-coding trnH-psbA spacer region. PLoS One 2: e508. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000508
[15]	Sanger F, Nicklen S, Coulson AR (1977) DNA sequencing with chain-terminating inhibitors. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 74: 5463-5467. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.74.12.5463
[16]	Kress WJ, Erickson DL, Jones FA, et al. (2009) Plant DNA barcodes and a community phylogeny of a tropical forest dynamics plot in Panama. Proc Natl Acad Sci 106: 18621-18626. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0909820106
[17]	Hajibabaei M, Baird DJ, Fahner NA, et al. (2005) A new way to contemplate Darwin's tangled bank: How DNA barcodes are reconnecting biodiversity science and biomonitoring. Phil Trans R Soc B 371: 20150330. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0330
[18]	CBOL Plant Working Group.A DNA barcode for land plants. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (2009) 106: 12794-12797. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0905845106
[19]	Bickford D, Lohman DJ, Sodhi NS, et al. (2017) Cryptic species as a window on diversity and conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 22: 148-155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2006.11.004
[20]	Hajibabaei M, Singer GAC, Hebert PDN, et al. (2007) DNA barcoding: How it complements taxonomy, molecular phylogenetics and population genetics. Trends Genet 23: 167-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2007.02.001
[21]	Collins RA, Cruickshank RH (2013) The seven deadly sins of DNA barcoding. Mol Ecol Resour 13: 969-975. https://doi.org/10.1111/1755-0998.12046
[22]	Shekhovtsov SV, Shekhovtsova IN, Peltek SE (2019) DNA Barcoding: Methods and approaches. Biol Bull Rev 9: 475-483. https://doi.org/10.1134/S2079086419060057
[23]	Ji Y, Ashton L, Pedley SM, et al. (2013) Reliable, verifiable and efficient monitoring of biodiversity via metabarcoding. Ecol Lett 16: 1245-1257. https://doi.org/10.1111/ele.12162
[24]	Barton NH, Hewitt GM (1985) Analysis of hybrid zones. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 16: 113-148. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.16.110185.000553
[25]	Deagle BE, Eveson JP, Jarman SN (2006) Quantification of damage in DNA recovered from highly degraded samples–a case study on DNA in faeces. Front Zool 3: 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1742-9994-3-11
[26]	Ogden R, Dawnay N, McEwing R, et al. (2009) Wildlife DNA forensics–bridging the gap between conservation genetics and law enforcement. Endang Species Res 9: 179-195. https://doi.org/10.3354/esr00144
[27]	Holmes BH, Steinke D, Ward RD (2009) Identification of shark and ray fins using DNA barcoding. Fish Res 95: 280-288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fishres.2008.09.036
[28]	Armstrong KF, Ball SL (2005) DNA barcodes for biosecurity: Invasive species identification. Phil Trans R Soc B 360: 1813-1823. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1713
[29]	Armstrong KF, Ball SL (2005) DNA barcodes for biosecurity: Invasive species identification. Phil Trans R Soc Land B: Biol Sci 360: 1813-1823. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1713
[30]	Packer L, Gibbs J, Sheffield C, et al. (2009) DNA barcoding and the mediocrity of morphology. Mol Ecol Resour 9: 42-50. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2009.02631.x
[31]	Valentini A, Miquel C, Nawaz MA, et al. (2009) New perspectives in diet analysis based on DNA barcoding and parallel pyrosequencing: The trnL approach. Mol Ecol Resour 9: 51-60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-0998.2008.02352.x
[32]	Stoeckle MY, Gamble CC, Kirpekar R, et al. (2011) Commercial teas highlight plant DNA barcode identification successes and obstacles. Sci Rep 1: 42. https://doi.org/10.1038/srep00042
[33]	Wong EHK, Hanner RH (2009) DNA barcoding detects market substitution in North American seafood. Food Res Int 41: 828-837. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodres.2008.07.005
[34]	Wilson EO (1992) The diversity of life.Harvard University Press.
[35]	Magurran AE (2004) Measuring biological diversity.Blackwell Publishing.
[36]	Taberlet P, Coissac E, Hajibabaei M, et al. (2012) Environmental DNA. Mol Ecol 21: 1789-1793. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05542.x
[37]	Dickinson JL, Zuckerberg B, Bonter DN (2010) Citizen science as an ecological research tool: Challenges and benefits. Annl Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41: 149-172. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102209-144636
[38]	Taberlet P, Coissac E, Pompanon F, et al. (2012) Power and limitations of the chloroplast trnL (UAA) intron for plant DNA barcoding. Nucleic Acids Res 35: e14. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkl938
[39]	Sayers EW, Cavanaugh M, Clark K, et al. (2019) GenBank. Nucleic Acids Res 48: D84-D86. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkz956
[40]	Meyer CP, Paulay G (2005) DNA barcoding: Error rates based on comprehensive sampling. PLoS Biol 3: e422. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0030422
[41]	Meier R, Zhang G, Ali F (2008) The use of mean instead of smallest interspecific distances exaggerates the size of the “barcoding gap” and leads to misidentification. Syst Biol 57: 809-813. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150802406343
[42]	Vences M, Thomas M, Bonett RM (2005) Deciphering amphibian diversity through DNA barcoding: Chances and challenges. Phil Trans R Soc B 360: 1859-1868. http://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1717
[43]	Darling JA, Mahon AR (2011) From molecules to management: Adopting DNA-based methods for monitoring biological invasions in aquatic environments. Environ Res 111: 978-988. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2011.02.001
[44]	Thomsen PF, Kielgast J, Iversen LL, et al. (2012) Detection of a diverse marine fish fauna using environmental DNA from seawater samples. PLoS One 7: e41732. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0041732
[45]	Nagarajan M, Parambath AN, Prabhu VR (2020) DNA barcoding: A potential tool for invasive species identification. DNA barcoding and molecular phylogeny. Cham: Springer 31-43. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50075-7_3
[46]	Wells JD, Stevens JR (2008) Application of DNA-based methods in forensic entomology. Annu Rev Entomol 53: 103-120. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ento.52.110405.091423
[47]	Thomsen PF, Willerslev E (2015) Environmental DNA–An emerging tool in conservation for monitoring past and present biodiversity. Biol Conserv 183: 4-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.019
[48]	Janzen DH, Hajibabaei M, Burns JM, et al. (2005) Wedding biodiversity inventory of a large and complex Lepidoptera fauna with DNA barcoding. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 360: 1835-1845. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1715
[49]	Valentini A, Pompanon F, Taberlet P (2008) DNA barcoding for ecologists. Trends Ecol Evol 24: 110-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2008.09.011
[50]	Lahaye R, van der Bank M, Bogarin D, et al. (2008) DNA barcoding the floras of biodiversity hotspots. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105: 2923-2928. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0709936105
[51]	Ogden R, Dawnay N, McEwing R (2009) Wildlife DNA forensics–bridging the gap between conservation genetics and law enforcement. Endang Species Res 9: 179-195. https://doi.org/10.3354/ESR00144
[52]	Funk DJ, Omland KE (2003) Species-level paraphyly and polyphyly: Frequency, causes, and consequences, with insights from animal mitochondrial DNA. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34: 397-423. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132421
[53]	Frankham R, Ballou JD, Briscoe DA (2002) Introduction to conservation genetics.Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511808999
[54]	Al-Juhani WS (2019) Evaluation of the capacity of the DNA barcode ITS2 for identifying and discriminating dryland plants. Genet Mol Res 18: gmr18133. https://doi.org/10.4238/gmr18133
[55]	Kress WJ, García-Robledo C, Uriarte M, et al. (2015) DNA barcodes for ecology, evolution, and conservation. Trends Ecol Evol 30: 25-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2014.10.008
[56]	Moritz C, Cicero C (2004) DNA barcoding: Promise and pitfalls. PLoS Biol 2: e354. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020354
[57]	Pons J, Barraclough TG, Gomez-Zurita J, et al. (2006) Sequence-based species delimitation for the DNA taxonomy of undescribed insects. Syst Biol 55: 595-609. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150600852011
[58]	Gilbert MTP, Moore W, Melchior L, et al. (2007) DNA extraction from dry museum beetles without conferring external morphological damage. PLoS One 2: e272. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0000272
[59]	Gündüz İ, Jaarola M, Tez C, et al. (2007) Multigenic and morphometric differentiation of ground squirrels (Spermophilus, Sciuridae, Rodentia) in Turkey, with a description of a new species. Mol Phylogenet Evol 43: 916-935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2007.02.021
[60]	Frezal L, Leblois R (2009) Four years of DNA barcoding: Current advances and prospects. Infect Genet Evol 8: 727-736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meegid.2008.05.005
[61]	DeSalle R, Egan MG, Siddall M (2014) The unholy trinity: Taxonomy, species delimitation and DNA barcoding. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 360: 1905-1916. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2005.1722
[62]	Ivanova NV, deWaard JR, Hebert PDN (2006) An inexpensive, automation-friendly protocol for recovering high-quality DNA. Mol Ecol Notes 6: 998-1002. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-8286.2006.01428.x
[63]	Taberlet P, Coissac E, Pompanon F, et al. (2012) Towards next-generation biodiversity assessment using DNA metabarcoding. Mol Ecol 21: 2045-2050. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05470.x
[64]	Oliver I, Beattie AJ (1996) Invertebrate morphospecies as surrogates for species: A case study. Conserv Biol 10: 99-109. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1996.10010099.x
[65]	Hebert PDN, Ratnasingham S, de Waard JR (2003) Barcoding animal life: Cytochrome c oxidase subunit 1 divergences among closely related species. Proc Biol Sci 270: S96-S99. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2003.0025
[66]	Turner CR, Barnes MA, Xu CCY, et al. (2014) Particle size distribution and optimal capture of aqueous macrobial eDNA. Methods Ecol Evol 5: 676-684. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12206
[67]	Leray M, Knowlton N (2017) DNA barcoding and metabarcoding of standardized samples reveal patterns of marine benthic diversity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 112: 2076-2081. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1424997112
[68]	Deveson IW, Gong B, Lai K, et al. (2021) Evaluating the analytical validity of circulating tumor DNA sequencing assays for precision oncology. Nat Biotechnol 39: 1115-1128. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41587-021-00857-z
[69]	Porter TM, Hajibabaei M (2018) Over 2.5 million COI sequences in GenBank and growing. PLoS One 13: e0200177. https://doi.org/10.1101/353904
[70]	Zhang AB, He LJ, Crozier RH, et al. (2010) Estimating sample sizes for DNA barcoding. Mol Phylogenet Evol 54: 1035-1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2009.09.014
[71]	Goldstein PZ, DeSalle R (2011) Integrating DNA barcode data and taxonomic practice: determination, discovery, and description. BioEssays 32: 135-147. https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.201000036
[72]	Shokralla S, Spall JL, Gibson JF, et al. (2012) Next-generation sequencing technologies for environmental DNA research. Mol Ecol 21: 1794-1805. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-294X.2012.05538.x
[73]	Smith MA, Bertrand C, Crosby K, et al. (2012) Wolbachia and DNA barcoding insects: Patterns, potential, and problems. PLoS One 8: e36574. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036514
[74]	Ekblom R, Galindo J (2011) Applications of next generation sequencing in molecular ecology of non-model organisms. Heredity 107: 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.2010.152
[75]	Ellegren H (2014) Genome sequencing and population genomics in non-model organisms. Trends Ecol Evol 29: 51-63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2013.09.008
[76]	Handelsman J (2004) Metagenomics: Application of genomics to uncultured microorganisms. Microbiol Mol Biol Rev 68: 669-685. https://doi.org/10.1128/MMBR.68.4.669-685.2004
[77]	Gilbert JA, Meyer F, Jansson J, et al. (2010) The earth microbiome project: Meeting report of the “1 EMP meeting on sample selection and acquisition” at Argonne National Laboratory October 6 2010. Stand Genomic Sci 3: 249-253. https://doi.org/10.4056/aigs.1443528
[78]	Aebersold R, Mann M (2016) Mass-spectrometric exploration of proteome structure and function. Nature 537: 347-355. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature19949
[79]	Fiehn O (2002) Metabolomics–the link between genotypes and phenotypes. Plant Mol Biol 48: 155-171.
[80]	Hassan ESRE, Rostom M, Farghaly FE, et al. (2020) Bio-sorption for tannery effluent treatment using eggshell wastes; kinetics, isotherm and thermodynamic study. Egy J Pet 29: 273-278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpe.2020.10.002
[81]	Srivathsan A, Meier R (2012) On the inappropriate use of Kimura-2-parameter (K2P) divergences in the DNA-barcoding literature. Cladistics 28: 190-194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1096-0031.2011.00370.x

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)